ArticleCancer2025
Comparison of survival outcomes for patients with Stage III vs de novo Stage IV breast cancer.
Article in Cancer, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Surgical Considerations for Patients With De Novo Metastatic Breast Cancer Based on Prognostic Group.The Journal of surgical research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeImprovements in systemic therapy have resulted in significant heterogeneity in survival outcomes for metastatic breast cancer patients. As such, recently proposed staging guidelines for de novo metastatic breast cancer stratify patients into four categories (IVA/IVB/IVC/IVD). Expanding on this, overall survival (OS) outcomes for patients with Stage III vs Stage IV breast cancer were compared based on the previously defined American Joint Committee on Cancer guidelines and recently proposed subgroups for de novo metastatic breast cancer.
methodsAdult patients diagnosed with Stage III or IV breast cancer in the National Cancer Database (2010-2019) were stratified as IIIA/B/C (American Joint Committee on Cancer, 8th edition) or IVA/B/C/D. OS was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Cox proportional hazards models estimated the association between stage subgroups and OS.
resultsAmong 81,128 patients (median follow-up, 76.8 months), 83.5% were Stage III and 16.5% Stage IV. Unadjusted 3-year OS rates were 85.7% for Stage III versus 68.3% for Stage IV. From Stage III to Stage IV, OS declined but there was notable convergence in OS between subgroups. The unadjusted 3-year OS for IIIC was 69.6%, which was lower than IVA (87.0%) and IVB (78.4%). Adjusted analysis showed similar trends, with the HR for IIIC at 1.94, which was worse than IVA at 1.20 and IVB at 1.83 (ref: IIIA, overall p < .001).
conclusionsIt was demonstrated that the survival outcomes for select patients with Stage IV breast cancer have significant convergence in OS with some patients with Stage III disease. These findings may be important for patient counseling, treatment approaches, and clinical trial design.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.